Sweta Dhariwal vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Sweta Dhariwal, filed a writ petition before the Calcutta High Court challenging an order dated 16th May, 2024, which cancelled her GST registration. The cancellation was based on a show cause notice issued on 6th February, 2024, for non-filing of returns under Section 39 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner's subsequent application for revocation of the cancellation order was also rejected. She then filed an appeal before the appellate authority on 9th August, 2024, under Section 107 of the said Act. The appeal remained pending, prompting the petitioner to file an application for early disposal on 9th September, 2024. The present writ petition seeks a direction to set aside the cancellation order or, alternatively, to hear the appeal on merits.
Held
The Court held that the appellate authority should hear and dispose of the appeal expeditiously, preferably within two weeks from the date of communication of the order. The reasoning was based on the fact that the cancellation of registration was primarily for non-filing of returns, and there was no indication of tax evasion by the petitioner. The Court observed that the cancellation of registration prevents the petitioner from carrying on business and raising invoices, which does not benefit the revenue. Therefore, a prompt disposal of the appeal was deemed necessary. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions.
Key Issues
1. Whether the appellate authority should be directed to hear and dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner on merits, considering the delay in adjudication. (Question of law and procedure) The petitioner argued that the appellate authority had not taken any steps to dispose of the appeal on merits despite the passage of time. The petitioner contended that the cancellation of registration was solely on the ground of non-filing of returns and that there was no allegation of tax evasion. The petitioner sought a direction for expeditious disposal of the appeal. The respondents (Union of India & Ors.) did not record any specific arguments in the judgment regarding the delay or the merits of the appeal.
Sections Cited
Section 39, Section 107
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
6 21.04.2025 sb Ct 5
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURI ICTION APPELLATE SIDE
WPA 3575 of 2025
Sweta Dhariwal Versus Union of India & Ors.
Ms. Sweta Mukherjee
… For the petitioner.
Mr. Shiv Sankar Banerjee
Mr. Abhradip Maity
… For the respondent nos.2 to 4. 1. Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on record.
The instant writ petition has been filed, inter alia, praying for a direction upon the appellate authority to set aside the order dated 16th May, 2024 or in the alternative to hear out the appeal on merits.
Records would reveal that pursuant to a show cause notice issued on 6th February, 2024 for cancellation of registration on account of non-filing of returns under Section 39 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the “said Act”), an order of cancellation of registration was issued on 16th May, 2024. 4. Although, it is contended that the petitioner had filed an application, inter alia, praying for revocation of order of cancellation, however, such application was
2 also rejected.
The petitioner has since filed an appeal before the appellate authority under Section 107 of the said Act on 9th August, 2024, the appellate authority is yet to hear out and dispose of the said appeal. Since, the appeal was kept pending, the petitioner has filed an application for early disposal, on 9th September, 2024. 6. Ms. Mukherjee, learned advocate appearing in support of the present writ petition would submit that till date no steps have been taken by the appellate authority to dispose of the appeal on merits.
Heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and considering the fact that the order of cancellation has been passed only on the ground of non-filing of returns and it is not the case of the respondents that the petitioner had been evading tax, I am of the view that the appellate authority should hear out and dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two weeks from the date of communication of this order, having regard to the fact that by reasons of cancellation of petitioner’s registration, the petitioner cannot carry on its business and raise invoices which ultimately does not enure to the benefit of revenue.
With the above observations and directions, the writ
3 petition stands disposed of.
There shall be no order as to costs. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance of requisite formalities. (Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)
Reproduced from the public record of the Calcutta High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.